The use of infrastructure as a catalyst for Indonesia’s economic growth faces significant challenges. One example is the construction projects, which have not reached the intended goal and have led to an increase in investment cost compared to the original plan. Additionally, the interaction between the government and companies involved in toll-road construction projects under the public-private partnerships (PPP) mechanism has yet to produce good quality project governance and expected project performance. This study aimed to find empirical data on the determination of project intellectual capital and project ownership structure through good project governance on toll-road project performance in Indonesia. This study adopted a quantitative approach that involved data collected through a survey conducted among toll-road projects from 2015 to 2019. The data was analyzed with Structural Equation Modeling Partial Least Square (SEM-PLS). The results showed that project intellectual capital and project ownership structure significantly affected good project governance. Good project governance Practices significantly affected project performance. Project intellectual capital and project ownership structure influenced project performance through the mediation of good project governance. Conversely, two hypotheses were not supported by the data, i.e., the effect of project intellectual capital and project ownership structure on project performance. The findings of this research contributed to the literature regarding the implementation of collaborative governance in PPPs toll road development projects in Indonesia by providing a framework and assessment tools, which could be valuable for researchers and policymakers in analyzing and evaluating the governance and performance of toll road construction PPP projects.

Although public-private partnership (PPP) is regarded as one of the key effective tools in the development of many countries, various challenges surrounding PPPs are not well understood. This paper explores nine key challenges in PPP implementation: (1) different organizational cultures and goals between the partners, (2) poor institutional environment and support, (3) weak political and legal frameworks, (4) unreliable mechanisms for sharing risk and responsibility, (5) inadequate procedures for the selection of PPP partners, (6) inconsistency between resource inputs and quality, (7) inadequate monitoring and evaluation of PPP processes, (8) lack of transparency, and (9) the inherent nature of PPPs. This paper aims to provide the perceptions in the existing literature on many of these challenges, as well as provide solutions to each challenge. 

While there has been much discussion about the large infrastructure needs in Asia and the Pacific, less attention has been paid to public expenditure efficiency in infrastructure services delivery. New constructions are not the only solution, especially when governments have limited capital to invest. Globally, new infrastructure projects face delays and cost overruns, leading to an inefficient use of public resources. The root causes include the lack of transparency in project selection, the lack of project preparation, the silo approach by public entities in assessing feasibility studies, and the lack of public sector capacity to fully develop a bankable pipeline of projects. To tackle these issues, governments need a smarter investment approach and to do so, enhancing public service efficiency is very crucial. The paper suggests a “whole life cycle” (WLC) approach as the main strategic solution for the discussed issues and challenges. We expand the definition of WLC to include the entire life cycle of the infrastructure asset from need identification to its disposal. The stages comprise planning, preparation, procurement, design, construction, operation and maintenance, and disposal. This is because we believe any efficient or inefficient decision throughout such a wide life cycle influences the quality of public services. Hence, in this holistic approach, infrastructure life cycle consists of four phases: planning, preparation, procurement, and implementation. Governments could enhance public efficiency and thus improve access to finance throughout the WLC by several solutions. These are (i) preparing infrastructure master plan and pipelines and long-term budgeting during the planning phase; (ii) establishing framework and guidelines and improving governance during preparation phase; (iii) promoting standardization, transparency, open government, and contractual consistency during the procurement phase; and finally (iv) continued role of government and total asset management during the implementation phase. In addition to these phase-specific means, key WLC solutions include proper use of technology, capacity building, and private participation in general and public-private partnership (PPP) in particular.

Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) are mostly presented as a means to introduce efficient procurement methods and better value for money to taxpayers. However, the complexity of the PPP mechanism, their lack of transparency, accounting rules and implicit liabilities make it often impossible to perceive the amount of public expenditure involved and the long-run impact on taxpayers, providing room for fiscal illusion, i.e., the illusion that PPPs are much less expensive than traditional public investments. This psaper, thanks to a systematic review of the literature on the EU countries experience, tries to unveil the sources of this illusion by looking at the reasons behind the PPPs’ choice, their real costs, and the sources of fiscal risks. The literature suggests that PPPs are more costly than public funding, especially when contingent liabilities are not taken into account, and are employed as mechanisms to circumvent budgetary restrictions and to spend off-balance. The paper concludes that the public sector should share more risks with private sectors by reducing the amount of guarantees, and should prevent governments from operating through a sleight of hand that deflects attention away from off-balance financing, by applying a neutral fiscal recording system.

Cross-border infrastructure projects offer significant economic and social benefits for the Asia-Pacific region. If the required investment of $8 trillion in pan-Asian connectivity was made in the region’s infrastructure during 2010–2020, the total net income gains for developing Asia could reach about $12.98 trillion (in 2008 US dollars) during 2010–2020 and beyond, of which more than $4.43 trillion would be gained during 2010–2020 and nearly $8.55 trillion after 2020. Indeed, infrastructure connectivity helps improve regional productivity and competitiveness by facilitating the movement of goods, services and human resources, producing economies of scale, promoting trade and foreign direct investments, creating new business opportunities, stimulating inclusive industrialization and narrowing development gaps between communities, countries or sub-regions. Unfortunately, due to limited financing, progress in the development of cross-border infrastructure in the region is low.

This paper examines the key challenges faced in financing cross-border projects and discusses the roles that different stakeholders—national governments, state-owned enterprises, private sector, regional entities, development financing institutions (DFIs), affected people and civil society organizations—can play in facilitating the development of cross-border infrastructure in the region. In particular, this paper highlights the major risks that deter private sector investments and FDIs and provides recommendations to address these risks.